Morning journal and courier., 1887-05-26
WATERING STREETS,

The Committee on Ordinances Hea,
 Present system of Watering TeIford
 PaVements-The City Said to Make
 Money By the Present System-The
 Cost of Repairs to Pavements and
 of Watering Them Since 1sS3-No
 Decision By the Committee as Yet l The committee on ordinances met in the
 aldermanic chamber last evening and con
 sidered the proposition of s. E. Merwin and l 75O others for repeal of the ordinance con- corning the watering of Telford pavements
 The committee considered this petition some
 time ago and reported to the city fathers that the petition should be granted. The l Court of Common Council in pursuance of | an order of the board of public works re-
 ferred the matter back to the committee for a further hearing.
 J. D. Dewell, the wholesale grocer, one of | the petitioners, was the first person heard. He was opposed to the existing ordinance which provides that the city pay for water ing Teiford pavements. In his opinion there would be just as much justice in requiring the taxpayers of the city to pay for cleaning the sidewalks on Chapel street and requiring the residents on other streets to clean our sidewalks. He did not think it possible that a saving of expense to the city had been l made in consequence of the ordinance F. $. Bradley said he signed the petition because he thought there was an inequality and injustice in obliging portion of the city to pay for watering the pavements of another portion.
 John s. Richardson, a resident of Dwight street, said he concurred with the view e1- pressed by MT. Bradley.
 Alderman Daley was the next to testify. He said that inasmuch as the matter had been recommended to the committee at the request of the board of public works he con. sidered it proper that the representatives of the board should state why they thought the ordinance should not be repealed. Clerk Waldron, of the board of public
 works, presented table of figures showing the cost of repairing and watering the Telford payements as follows Number of square yards of Telford pavements in 1883, ,215, ,292; cost of repairing, $12, ,651.67; cost of watering, $1,- 293 99 Number of square yards of Telford pavement in 1884. 245, ,6s5; cost of repairing, BIO, ,5oe47; watering, s1,90a.91. in 1885, 261 ,670 square yards; cost of repairs, ST. s69 30; watering, $2,366.34. In 1886, 317,- 925 square yards; repairs, $4. 269.7 Fl; water ing, $4. 4.27s19.
 In response to questions MT. Waldron said he thought it would cost about $5,500 to water the Telford payements for 1887 He thought ehalf of the amount of the ex pense of repairing the Telford pavements had been saved in consequence of the passage of the ordinance The saving to the city if the present plan was continued would be from $1 800 to S2,000 during the coming year. The pavements would be in much bet ter condition also. He said the city watered the Telford pavements simply to preserve them, and not to accommodate the people. Before the city had attended to the watering of the pavements many people kept the pave ments too wet and others did not water them at all.
 Street Inspector Doyle next testified. He said the pavements were watered as often as needed-some places every day, others not more than once week. The pavements were watered not so much to preserve them as to accommodate the residents. Extraer- dinary repairs have been caused in every case by excessive watering. He thought if the present system of street watering was continued the amount of repairs would be much less than for last year. By judicious watering, as done by the city, the repairs would be less, but if pri- expended for repairs would increase. He estimated the saving to the city repairs $4 900 year. The pavements to-day are better kept, in better condition and give more satisfaction than they ever have since the first pavement was laid.
 City Engineer Hill said in his judgment the present method of watering streets was very great saving to the city. As the system was continued the saving would increase. He knew there would be saving in repair ing. It would be greater each year.
 Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Daley made very strong argument against the present system of watering the pavements. He thought it gross injustice to the taxpay- CTS of the city who lived on unpaved streets. The only saving there would be-granting that there was @ saving-would come from the pockets of the people on the outskirts. The watering could be regulated the same as in many other cities. He didn't know of any hot hot fho Hov in eration. It was held unconstitutional. John Shaughnessy was of the opinion that it was 8 gross injustice to the people who lived on the unpaved streets to have the present system continued
 Curtiss F. Evarts thought taxing the poor to support the rich would not prevail long. He said that the Telford pavements were 8 failure. They could not be watered enough to lay the dust without destroying the rave- ment.
 A member of the committee said that it had been intimated to some members of the committee that the New Haven Water com pany had been making money by the present system and were opposed to any change. Captain Eyarts, who holds stock in the wa ter company, said that he was informed by a director of the company that million gal Ions more water was used by the old plan. He thought the company would lose mo ney if the old plan was adopted.
 William G.. Dickerman was in favor of re- taining the present system on the score of economy and health.
 Dr. Hubbard testified that in his opinion the interests of public health demanded that the present system be retained.
 Police Commissioner Herbert E. Benton wanted the present system revoked. He thought that the matter should be left en- tirely to the board of public works. He spoke strongly against the system now used. The committee at 11:15 adjourned subject to the call of the chair.